A detail in a proof about isomorphism classes of groups of order 21

Whovian
Messages
651
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement



While reading through my textbook on abstract algebra while studying for a test, I ran across the following statement:

There are two isomorphism classes of groups of order 21: the class of ##C_{21}##, and the class of a group ##G## generated by two elements ##x## and ##y## that satisfy the relations ##x^7=1##, ##y^3=1##, ##yx=x^2y##

along with a proof of this statement. The proof looks fairly reasonable, only there's a bit I don't quite understand:

"The Third Sylow Theorem shows us that the Sylow 7-subgroup ##K## [existence and uniqueness guaranteed by the Third Sylow Theorem] must be normal ..."

Specifically, why must ##K\trianglelefteq G##?

Homework Equations



Third Sylow Theorem: If ##G## is a group of order ##n<\aleph_0##, where ##n=p^e\cdot m## for some ##e>0## and ##\lnot\left(p|m\right)##, for some prime ##p##, and ##s## is the number of Sylow ##p##-subgroups of ##G##, then ##s|m## and ##s\equiv1\pmod p##.

The Attempt at a Solution



Fairly nonexistent; I can't think of any reason this subgroup must be normal.

(If this post would be more appropriate in the linear & abstract algebra section, feel free to move it there.)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Whovian said:

Homework Statement



While reading through my textbook on abstract algebra while studying for a test, I ran across the following statement:

There are two isomorphism classes of groups of order 21: the class of ##C_{21}##, and the class of a group ##G## generated by two elements ##x## and ##y## that satisfy the relations ##x^7=1##, ##y^3=1##, ##yx=x^2y##

along with a proof of this statement. The proof looks fairly reasonable, only there's a bit I don't quite understand:

"The Third Sylow Theorem shows us that the Sylow 7-subgroup ##K## [existence and uniqueness guaranteed by the Third Sylow Theorem] must be normal ..."

Specifically, why must ##K\trianglelefteq G##?

Homework Equations



Third Sylow Theorem: If ##G## is a group of order ##n<\aleph_0##, where ##n=p^e\cdot m## for some ##e>0## and ##\lnot\left(p|m\right)##, for some prime ##p##, and ##s## is the number of Sylow ##p##-subgroups of ##G##, then ##s|m## and ##s\equiv1\pmod p##.

The Attempt at a Solution



Fairly nonexistent; I can't think of any reason this subgroup must be normal.

(If this post would be more appropriate in the linear & abstract algebra section, feel free to move it there.)

Use what they are saying about ##s## to show there must be only one 7-subgroup. So?
 
There must be a 7-subgroup; I just don't see why it must be a normal subgroup.
 
Whovian said:
There must be a 7-subgroup; I just don't see why it must be a normal subgroup.

Use the definition of normal. There is only ONE 7-subgroup.
 
I'm used to normal being defined as "closed under conjugation by elements of G." Is there a different or equivalent definition I'm missing or something else obvious which makes clear that only one 7-subgroup existing means said subgroup is normal? (Knowing me, most likely.)
 
If you conjugate a subgroup, the result is another subgroup of the same size. So if there's only one subgroup of order 7...
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top